Projections of the Fire Weather Danger over Central Europe using EURO-CORDEX simulations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increasing temperatures and harsher drought conditions in recent decades have enhanced the risk of wildfire in many regions across the globe. Recent fire activity in Central Europe raised concerns about the possible expansion of the fire weather danger conditions under climate change outside the present-day fire-prone regions, such as the Mediterranean Basin. Here, we employ the widely used Canadian Fire Weather Index (FWI) system to assess the historical and future trends in the fire weather danger for Central Europe. Calculation of the originally proposed FWI requires utilizing noon-time temperature, relative humidity, wind, and accumulated precipitation. Using the ERA5 reanalysis dataset, we make sensitivity analyses with different combinations of alternative input data for noon-time meteorological parameters and estimate their biases.This study uses an ensemble of regional climate models (RCM) from the EURO-CORDEX domain. We first compare the results from ERA5 with the RCM ensemble for the historical period. Then, we analyze future projections for Central Europe under different global warming levels (+2 K and +3 K). Results indicate that the fire-prone areas consistently increase under warmer climate conditions, including emerging fire-prone regions in Central and Northern Europe.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".